Tribal Case Law Database
A comprehensive collection of federal cases, tribal court decisions, statutes, and policy memos forming the legal foundation for tribal sovereignty, P.L. 280 limitations, retrocession, and tribal court authority.
About This Database
This case-law database supports Agency Tribal Nations' jurisdictional arguments against state and county encumbrance of Indian Country — specifically the Mendocino Indian Reservation (36 sq mi, Laytonville–Ukiah, Albion–Westport). Each case is broken out into its own dedicated page covering citation, holding, facts, reasoning, and how it supports ATN's sovereignty claims.
The cases are organized into seven categories: Foundational Sovereignty, Cases Limiting P.L. 280, Tribal Court Authority, Constitutional & Federal Power, California-Specific, Federal Authority & Policy, and Treaties & International Law. Topical deep-dives on consent, trust doctrine, encumbrance, and treaty relationships are linked at the bottom of this page.
Foundational Sovereignty
The bedrock cases establishing tribal nations as sovereign political entities under federal — not state — jurisdiction.
Worcester v. Georgia
31 U.S. 515 — Tribes are "distinct, independent political communities" beyond state authority.
Elk v. Wilkins
112 U.S. 94 — Tribal members owe primary allegiance to their tribes; tribal political distinctness.
Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock
187 U.S. 553 — Plenary power doctrine and the federal-tribal trust relationship.
Williams v. Lee
358 U.S. 217 — Infringement test: state courts may not infringe on tribal self-government.
Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez
436 U.S. 49 — Tribal sovereign immunity and exclusive tribal court jurisdiction over internal affairs.
McGirt v. Oklahoma
591 U.S. 894 — Reservations remain Indian Country until Congress expressly disestablishes them.
Cases Directly Limiting P.L. 280
Decisions that narrow P.L. 280 to criminal jurisdiction and private civil disputes — denying any state regulatory or taxing authority over tribes.
Kennerly v. District Court
400 U.S. 423 — State court jurisdiction requires affirmative tribal consent under P.L. 280.
McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission
411 U.S. 164 — States cannot tax tribal members for income earned on the reservation.
Bryan v. Itasca County
426 U.S. 373 — P.L. 280 grants no state regulatory or taxing authority over tribal lands.
Fisher v. District Court
424 U.S. 382 — Exclusive tribal court jurisdiction over reservation adoption proceedings.
United States v. California
9th Cir. — California's regulatory authority over tribal lands rejected.
Washington v. Yakima Indian Nation
439 U.S. 463 — P.L. 280 partial assumption is permissible; checkerboard jurisdiction limits.
White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker
448 U.S. 136 — Bracker preemption test balancing tribal, federal, and state interests.
Three Affiliated Tribes v. Wold Engineering
467 U.S. 138; 476 U.S. 877 — State disclaimer of jurisdiction; civil/regulatory distinction.
California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
480 U.S. 202 — Civil/regulatory laws do not apply to tribes under P.L. 280.
Tribal Court Authority
Cases and statutes affirming the inherent jurisdiction of tribal courts and tribal criminal authority.
Duro v. Reina
495 U.S. 676 — Tribal criminal jurisdiction (later restored by Congress via "Duro fix").
Walker v. Rushing
898 F.2d 672 — P.L. 280 does not divest tribal courts of concurrent jurisdiction.
United States v. Lara
541 U.S. 193 — Tribes possess inherent sovereign authority over non-member Indians.
VAWA 2013 & 2022
Special Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction over non-Indians for covered crimes.
Haaland v. Brackeen
599 U.S. 255 — ICWA upheld; tribes are political entities, not racial classifications.
Lexington Insurance Co. v. Smith
117 F.4th 1106 — Modern reaffirmation of tribal court civil jurisdiction.
Constitutional & Federal Power
Cases addressing the constitutional limits on federal authority over tribes — termination, retrocession, nondelegation, and federal preemption.
Menominee Tribe v. United States
391 U.S. 404 — Treaty rights survive termination absent express congressional abrogation.
Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla v. Jewell
729 F.3d 1025 — BIA's discretion over P.L. 280 law enforcement funding.
Gundy v. United States
588 U.S. ___ — Nondelegation doctrine; limits on congressional delegation of authority.
Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta
597 U.S. ___ — Concurrent state jurisdiction over crimes by non-Indians against Indians.
California-Specific Authority
California-focused cases, statutes, and tribal court systems directly relevant to the Mendocino Indian Reservation.
Hoopa Valley Tribe — TLOA § 1162(d)
Tribal Law and Order Act partial retrocession framework.
Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. California
Recent 9th Circuit affirmation of tribal authority within California.
Northern California Intertribal Court System (NCICS)
Operational California intertribal court demonstrating tribal court infrastructure.
Federal Authority & Policy
Executive branch policy guidance and presidential statements affirming tribal self-determination and concurrent jurisdiction.
Nixon's 1970 Special Message to Congress
End of termination era; launch of federal self-determination policy.
DOJ Office of Tribal Justice — Concurrent Tribal Authority Memo
DOJ's official position confirming concurrent tribal court authority under P.L. 280.
Treaties & International Law
International and treaty-based authorities supporting tribal sovereignty and self-determination.
Murray v. The Schooner Charming Betsy
6 U.S. 64 — Statutes construed consistently with international law (Charming Betsy canon).
UNDRIP — U.S. Endorsed
UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; U.S. endorsement 2010.
Topical Legal Briefs
In addition to the case database, we maintain dedicated topical briefs synthesizing the case law into the four pillars of ATN's P.L. 280 sovereignty argument.
Argument III: Consent
Tribal consent as the foundation for state jurisdiction.
Trust Doctrine
Federal trust responsibility to tribal nations.
State Courts
State court limitations under P.L. 280.
Encumbrance
State/county encumbrance of Indian Country.
Treaties
Treaty-based tribal sovereignty.
Worcester Doctrine
Foundational sovereignty doctrine deep-dive.